Following Up On College World Series Bunts
Last week, I took a look at bunting in the World Series. Unsurprisingly, the college game contains many, many more bunts than the professional game. I surmised that college teams were bunting too often, and I made the (obvious) claim that bunts would make a large impact on the final games of the Series. Let’s take a look at what actually happened.
Vanderbilt vs. Florida
This game saw a whopping six bunts, with five of them coming from the Gators. Naturally, as I had published last week’s piece as this game was still in progress, Florida’s bunts killed the Commodores. Although the first three bunts (two from Florida, one from Vanderbilt) all came in scoreless innings, the Gators’ three bunts in the later innings were the key to their victory. In the sixth, a would-be sac bunt resulted in a throwing error, and a run scored on a subsequent double play to push Florida’s lead to 4-1. By the eighth, though, Vanderbilt had managed to tie the game. Florida then used two bunt singles — generously called singles, as Vanderbilt pitcher and 18th overall draft pick Sonny Gray had trouble fielding them — to load the bases with nobody out. Florida managed to plate two runs and would go on to win by the 6-4 score.
Virginia vs. South Carolina
This game went to extra innings, where everybody plays for one run, so we shouldn’t be surprised by the massive total of nine bunts in this game. Supporters of the bunt in the college game need look no further than the bottom of the 13th inning, as after a leadoff single, the Gamecocks plated the winning run after two errors on the Cavalier’s pitcher on consecutive would-be sacrifice bunts. However, before that, the bunt was futile: all of one run scored on the seven prior bunt attempts, and that was largely the result of an error after the bunt. Now, the pitching on this day was so good that we can’t really say whether or not the lack of scoring was due to strategic error or simply great pitching. My personal opinion is that both played a part — making great pitchers only get two outs per inning just makes their jobs easier.
Florida vs. South Carolina, Game 1
This game was an absolute thriller, one that had twitterers imploring each other to drop everything and flip over to ESPN. There was only one bunt used before the eighth inning, used by Florida in the fourth. It failed to bring in a run, as the next two Florida batters couldn’t deliver a single to score the runner from second. South Carolina succeeded in a similar situation in the eighth, getting a two-out single to score a run after a sac bunt. The game remained tied at one through regulation.
Here’s when the craziness began. After holding South Carolina scoreless in the top of the 10th, the Gators led off the inning with a single. Naturally, as they’re playing for one run, they bunted him over to second. After a pop-up and an intentional walk, the Gators got the single they needed to win the game… except the runner was thrown out at home from left field. The Gamecocks managed to get a runner on with one out in the top of the 11th, but instead of opting for the sacrifice bunt, they attempted a stolen base. The throw went into center field, and as the runner went for third, the throw back from the outfield went into the stands, allowing the run to score.
The Gators went back to the bunt immediately in the bottom of the 11th as their leadoff man reached once again. The bunt successfully moved the runner to second, but South Carolina’s shutdown closer Matt Price easily recorded the next two outs to end the game.
Florida vs. South Carolina, Game 2
South Carolina opened the scoring in this game after a sacrifice bunt in the third inning, but once again the real culprit was an error later in the inning, allowing two unearned runs to come in. The Gamecocks also brought in a run after a sacrifice bunt on a single in the 8th inning. The other four bunts in the game were unsuccessful. Alas, for the real bunt enthusiast, this game lacked the drama of the previous three.
Overall, the bunt was largely unsuccessful in producing runs, although, as I mentioned above, we can’t be sure if this was a matter of tactical failure or merely poor offense. Florida and South Carolina can both credit bunts as a large part of their ascent to the Championship Series, but at the same time, Florida’s failure to score runs after bunts in the first game was key to their downfall.
I am still of the opinion, personally, that these teams would be better off bunting less and letting their batters try and put the ball in play — the worse defense in the college game applies on batted balls as well as bunted balls — but the findings and opinions presented here are anecdotal and not meant to be taken as scientific fact in any way.
0
From what I saw, I think the lack of defense does shift the balance in favor of bunting much more often. Bunt plays generally involve split-second timing, and although it’s generally a pretty easy play for a big leaguer, the arms and fielding abilities of college athletes on the whole make it much easier for something to get screwed up. The throw bounces or is a little bit off the bag, and the player has a single/reaches on an error. It seemed like the lesser defensive abilities didn’t show up as much on non-bunt plays, as with ground balls the player usually has some time to steady themselves and step toward first base and make a routine throw, and fly balls are pretty easy to get right assuming they’re hit somewhere around an outfielder. I guess what I’m saying is the difference between bunt BABIP (and the chances of reaching on an error) from college to the big leagues seems to be much bigger than the difference in overall BABIP.
Not only that, but there’s also a bigger disparity between quality of hitters in college. In MLB, even the worst hitters (more or less) are able to hit pretty decently. You’re better off not wasting an out and trying for a single. In college, an ace pitcher is more dominant than in the pro’s, and a bad hitter is much worse than a bad MLBer. So I would expect that there are more situations in college where the batter is damn near a guaranteed out.
Your analysis also helps to elucidate why bunting probably made sense during the dead-ball era, with the small gloves and (presumably) fielders not as good as those today.
From what I saw, the number pop ups and K’s with men on base were numerous.
The pitching was so far ahead of the hitting that I nearly had tears of joy.
When teams did swing awat, they were rarely successful. The story of the series was a lack of offense and poor BA with RISP. The pop ups and K’s with men on had to be record setting if they keep records for such things.
How many times did teams bring in relievers that got out of “impossible jams”?
What everyone fails to recognize about sac bunts is that when the next batter is walked it makes the bunt a wasted AB (since runner can also advance from 1st to 2nd on a walk).
Also if a runner scores off a single and the next batter hits a homer, double or even a single it makes the sac bunt a waste because the runner would have scored anyway.
Granted I’m overlooking a possible downside to not bunting … a ground ball could easily become a double play. But generally I’d be willing to bet that you lose more base runners due to sac bunts, then double plays.
I love how you all have a hypothesis that “small ball” is wrong. The article starts with that premise that it’s wrong based on the results of two baseball games. That is laughable. We all know that bunting is based on the situation and makeup of a team. You get a leadoff double late in a tie game, unless, you have the heart of the order coming up, You bunt. Why? Because you can take the lead w/ an out and the infield will play in and that raises BA by 100 points. Other times you may do it, is if you have a great pitcher on the mound and expect a low scoring game. There is no one way to play baseball, The steroid era is over, so, speed and “small ball” are back in style. There is always a risk of wasting an out and no strategy is fool proof, but, in many situations it is the best way to win a ball game. Two Games does not prove anything…Did you analyze how bunting got them to this game? For some people these advanced stats are like ideology and its as if they never played baseball. They are useful,but, not omnipotent.
We really need to look at who is bunting. If it’s the 8 or 9 hitters and the pitcher wants to walk the next guy to face a better hitter in a force out situation, I think the offense will take that.
There were very few extra base hits and even fewer homers, which means it’s going to take 2 hits to score that guy from first. So few teams were getting those hits especially from the bottom.
So many of the hits were ground balls that just got through the IF.
The Florida-Carolina game was a perfect example. Bases loaded no outs, and they couldn’t get the ball out of the IF.
If the offences were driving the ball, it’d be completely different.
I’m not sure I have the interest to compile the stats, but the BABIP and SLG for all teams had to be very low.
Carolina essentially won a game on a ground ball that was 1 inch over Florida pitcher’s glove and then a throwing error. The series was completely void of batters driving the ball. It was stunning.
I might check and see waht the overall BA with runners on was. My guess is that it is far lower than the ML average, which is what we’re using for reference. I’d also bet that the run values for walks and singles is lower than ML averages as well.
I grew up in the Gorilla Ball era, and this CWS was like going from the steroid era to the dead ball/bat era.
Here’s how the overall stats compare …
STAT: ’11 CWS / ’08-’10 MLB Seasons (50% ’10, 25% ’09, 25% ’08)
BA – .240/.260
OBP – .307/.329
SLG – .315/.410
OPS – .622/.739
BB – 6.5/6.6
K – 15.9/13.9
R – 7.2/9.0
2B – 2.3/3.6
3B – 0.5/0.4
HR – 0.6/2.0
Seriously, looking at the decreased doubles and home runs in the CWS, combined with the overall lower BA it’s pretty obvious that teams were playing with the mindset that they aren’t going to get 2-3 singles in an inning to plate a run … and they aren’t counting on doubles and homers (especially from the bottom of the order).
The Runs per game isn’t all that bad considering. Much like MLB, that number is higher due to 8-3 type games. My guess is there aren’t many bunts in these type of games in the CWS either.
For a comparison, Yuneisky Betancourt is batting .242 with a .352 SLG … both marks better than the CWS average. YB’s value with the bat is -11.7 runs.
The only problem with these numbers are that the CWS numbers are depressed by all the bunting.
Bunts for singles are counted the same as singles, and ought to be: the defense has to play them in the same way and require athleticism and skill to execute, so including them in any statistical comparison is absolutely valid.
Sacrifice bunts are not counted in any of the statistics CircleChange11 listed there, so no, there would be no depression of the stats by all the bunting.
To me what’s of relevance is exactly the stats listed here: when, relative to ‘normal’ baseball conditions, offence can’t achieve, unorthodox, small ball strategies are more effective. While anecdotal observations of more pop-ups, K’s, and GIDPs are interesting, quantifying the benefits to these strategies can be achieved by looking at the probability of scoring in any situation (say, with a runner on first and nobody out), and comparing that probability with that of an advanced runner at the cost of an out (say if the runner from first is advanced on a SAC).
If the historical data suggests that the probability of scoring from first with nobody out, combined with the combined probabilities of all the successive batters coming to the plate that inning is less than the probability of a runner scoring from second with one out, again combined with the total probabilities of all the successive batters coming to the plate that inning, then bunting makes sense. Otherwise it doesn’t. Of course, these probabilities at the CWS are going to be vastly different than at the MLB level for a variety of reasons, generally related to the broader talent spectrum at the College level: some pitchers are more dominant than others, some can field better, some batters are more dominant than others, some infields are more capable of turning the double play than others. This is contrast to the Show, where a more consistent skillset prevails.
Interesting article, thanks.
I assume that most of the guys sac bunting are the weaker hitters. The data presented showed that nearly all of the sac bunts were successful in their intended purpose. So, the manager moved a runner with a batter that was pretty much assumed to be an out anyway, and avoided a possible rally killing double play.
The overall batting average in the CWS was .240. I consider it a reasonable assumption that the batters sac bunting are at the lower end of that spectrum. So I don’t view it as being much different than having a pitcher bunt in MLB.
It was eye opening to me just how poor some of the batters were at the bottom of some of these lineups were.
I looked at the regular season trends in college baseball. The new bat rules resulted in the lowest BA and highest fielding pct since 1975 (lowest HR and run scoring too).
We’ve played in some wood bat tournaments and the most glaring thing to me were the amount of plays 3B and SS were making to their left. The 2-hop rockets that normally go for singles were now 3-hop routine plays. You could also have your OF play 20 feet closer and dare a batter to drive it over their heads, while taking away bloop singles.
Also, if you have a catcher that can take away the running game, you essentially force a team to get 3 singles to score a run. Those odds are significantly in the defense’s favor. Stolen bases, advancing on passed balls, wild pitches, or balls blocked in the dirt (and even sac bunts) are often huge defensive weapons. In that regard it’s not much different than youth travel baseball.
Do you really want to be wasting outs when you are having a tough enough time hitting anyway?
With the way the defense was shifting in, you would think maybe a batter would have tried a butcher boy play, but I don’t recall seeing a single one. It would certainly help keep the defense honest on their charging in.
Also, there was more than one time throughout the tourney (regionals and supers included) when the managers bunted with 3, 4, or 5 hitters. It isn’t simply a bottom of the order phenomenon. Basically, if the leadoff man got aboard, they were bunting next regardless of where they were in the lineup.